The Value of Owls

Tags

, , , , ,

One of the challenges artists face is avoiding the urge to hug the mid-tonal range. The human brain is great at summarising necessary information and finding patterns but this can work against us when we are trying to observe what is actually in front of our eyes. What we tend to do instinctively is tentatively fill in the extremes of light and shade,

Classic art training recommends making a grid of progressively darker shaded squares to act as a guide beside our work – an absolute shade reference to compare against the relative shade of the surrounding parts of the picture, which can trick our eye and lead us astray. Adding just a couple of extra shade ranges can make the difference between a dull, flat-looking image and a rich, photorealistic one. In days gone by a person could spend a year or two just studying greyscale images to get used to the importance of shading before moving onto colour.

To help demonstrate this concept let’s use a photograph of a living Theropod. Here we have a White-faced Scops Owl and we’re going to break down the photo into sections based on each pixel’s value. Before taking a peek at the end result, take some time to look at the photograph: see if you can predict where the mid ranges are; where the highlights are; where the shadows are. Chances are you’ve divided the image into 3 in your head and this is what translates onto the canvas without practice.

white-faced scops

White -faced Scops Owl

Now let’s take a look at the pieces of the image. I made a utility in C# to getnerate these for any given photograph. I’ve placed a swatch of the shades beside each generated value with a highlight to indicate which shade range we’re looking at. I had to offset the backgrounds by 128 shades to make it easier to view but I can provide transparent versions of these for anyone who’s interested – it’s quite fun pasting each image into a new layer in Photoshop Elements and watching the image build back up. I thought about making an animated GIF of it but the colour palette distortion would have been deceptive.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this. Next time I shall be wading into the murky world of diffraction…

Something in the Water does not Compute

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Controversy, thy name is PubSci. This evening we heard a talk by Professor Martin Chaplin on the remarkable properties of water. The talk started with some very unusual observations: firstly that liquid water contracts when heated, while most things expand; secondly that water molecules may move apart as the water density increases. It sounds counter-intuitive but there are good reasons for it.

Dr. Chaplin discussed the predictable instability of water: how the H2O bonds constantly break apart and form ion pairs, which last for mere milliseconds but 1 in every 60 water molecules exist as an ion pair at any one time. This allows water to form (H2O)5 molecular clusters, which break and re-form easily.

Dr. Chaplin showed that water behaves counter-intuitively in other ways too. At -100 degrees Celsius you get glassy structures, change the temperature or the pressure and crystals form. Water also behaves like two different substances depending on the pressure: at high pressure it behaves like other liquids; at low pressure it does not.

When electrically charged, water can defy gravity – creating a bridge between two bodies of water that flows one direction on the outside and the opposite direction on the inside. This is so odd it deserves its own paragraph and I can’t believe I almost forgot to add it.

Just like the subject of his talk, the talk itself got stranger as time went on. We covered nano bubbles (100 nm cavities in the water) and the Young-Laplace equation, why Nature Journal is convinced they don’t exist (Nature 2007, 445, 129) and how they can be measured and differentiated from dust particles using resonant mass measurement, dynamic light scattering, laser scattering, electrical resistance, and Brownian motion. Whilst I applaud any scientist who does not commit the Appeal to Authority fallacy and accept the findings of an established journal just because they said so, I did get the very strong feeling that a large part of his argument was an appeal to our fondness for the underdog up against the establishment – or what I call Dr. Jack Horner syndrome.

My suspicions were borne out as the subject turned to “water having memory”. The basis given for this statement was that when you stir one of two identical glasses of water, you can tell which one was stirred by examining the chemical composition of it. Glass dissolves so the stirred glass will have minutely higher traces of silica in it than the unstirred glass. If you stirred it long enough you would have hydrogen peroxide. At this point an audience member asked whether she could produce enough hydrogen peroxide to dye her hair – to which Dr. Chaplin replied that her hair would be white by the time she finished. Another audience member brought up the point that all matter in the universe has “memory” by this definition and that his insistence in the case of water was some sort of fetish on his part.

What intrigued me about Dr. Chaplin’s presentation style was that he defended elements of the validity of homeopathy without believing in homeopathy itself. I would very much like to see a presentation made by him in front of a pro-homeopathy crowd to see how different it is. I think Chaplin really enjoys goading people and that comes across strongly in his performance.

He raised some interesting questions at the end: whether the binary state of H2O / ion pair could be responsible for the memory of living organisms in the same way that binary switches work in computing; and whether the states of water could be integral to our understanding of cancer – in cancer cells the water tends to be more fluid.

A fascinating and engaging talk, even though I felt I was being coerced into agreeing with him at times (projection slide labelled “closed mind or water has memory”), which is always a turn-off.

Come along next month – we’re either talking about: debunked alien babies; 1960′s spaceballs; or swimming robots depending on the timetable of the speakers. Whatever the topic, science + beer = good.

20130514-085617.jpg

Of Moths & Monkeys: a PubSci Darwin Day Special

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

To celebrate the 204th birthday of the father of modern biology, the Horniman Museum’s Rachel Jennings gave a talk last night at the Albert Arms about the depth and breadth of Charles Darwin’s work.

Darwin investigated everything: from the changing face of geological formations to the effects of piano music on earthworms. Though he is most known for his Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, this is by no means the only thing he published. We have amassed a large body of data since Darwin’s day including entire new disciplines such as genetics. How have Darwin’s predictions held up? What did he get right and what was Darwin wrong about?

In the Origin, Darwin agreed with the naturalists of his day in concluding that the vast variety of pigeon breeds were descended from a single common ancestor: Columba livia. This was conclusively proved last week when a genetic study was done on a number of pigeon breeds. The study also found that the mutation which causes feathers to grow in the wrong direction – seen in the Old German Owl Pigeon or Indian Fantail Pigeon, has also arisen only once and has been selected repeatedly by breeders.

Keeping with the domestic breeding theme, Darwin studied the various breeds of domestic dog and came to the conclusion that they were too different to have come from a single wild species – that there must have been some crossing of multiple wild dogs to produce the canine spectrum from Chihuahua to St. Bernard.
20130212-213517.jpg
Subsequent studies have demonstrated, based on genetics and morphological character analyses, that all the breeds of dog do indeed stem from the Grey Wolf (‘African Pitbull’ aside). Darwin would probably have been delighted to hear that he was wrong in his conclusion as he once said that a single origin of dogs would lend great weight to his theory.

During his travels Darwin encountered many unusual plants and animals. Not least of which was Angraecum sesquipedale, or Darwin’s Orchid.
20130212-212958.jpg
Darwin’s Orchid image taken from Wikimedia Commons. Reproduced under a Creative Commons licence.

When he saw it, Darwin predicted that there would be an animal somewhere nearby adapted to feeding from it – one with a tongue long enough to reach the nectar. When he first said it, his contemporaries scoffed. The discovery of Xanthopan morgani, or “Morgan’s Sphynx” fulfilled that prediction.

On the subject of peacocks: Darwin reportedly was sickened by the sight of a peacock’s tail (he was in very poor health anyway though, so we won’t hold it against him). His explanation for the tail was to attract a mate – the larger and more spotted the tail, the more likely the male would pass on his genes. The actual situation is somewhat more complicated: for starters, removing eye spots did indeed reduce mating success but adding them seemed to have no significant effect. The peacock caused quite a stir in the question and answers round – an animal evolving a handicap to prove its prowess? What other examples are there of this? To which Paolo promptly wheeled out the human penis (thankfully metaphorical): Humans have the largest penis to body ratio of any primate and also have no bone supporting it. A male who can still get it up despite the odds stacked against him (stress, et al) is clearly worth mating with.

In The Ascent of Man, Darwin wrote: “An American monkey, after getting drunk on brandy, would never touch it again, and thus is much wiser than most men”. Darwin was wrong about the monkeys – as demonstrated by a study of a population of Vervet Monkeys on the island of St. Kitts. In the study, the monkeys could be divided into four groups: the teetotal group, representing about 10-15% of the population; the social drinkers, around 65%, drink more in the evenings – largely female; the steady drinkers, around 15% of the population, drink more in the mornings; and the binge drinkers, 5% of the population whose alcohol consumption per kg per day exceeds the fatal dose in humans! The theory is that an affection for alcohol may be linked to the ability to locate ripe fruit. Rachel is not convinced:

In conclusion: Darwin was a very gifted naturalist and very thorough researcher. We should celebrate the advancement of collected data and the ways in which Darwin has been corrected over time. If we try to sanctify the memory of Darwin into a figure who made no mistakes we not only give future naturalists an impossible role model, we also create a symbol out of the man instead of letting the integrity of his body of work stand for itself.

That’s all for now. Come along on the 11th next month when we will be discussing the marriage of art & science. http://pubsci.co.uk/

Collections at risk: what can we do?

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yesterday evening I had a very interesting chat with The Horniman Museum’s Paolo Viscardi about collections under threat of damage or destruction. I expected the primary contributor to be human civil unrest but, as it turns out, our Natural History collections have far more to fear from a budget cut than from an angry mob with pitchforks. Paolo said that I would be surprised how often people end up rummaging through skips to retrieve type specimens in the aftermath of a closure. I was horrified that it has happened even once!

There are two things a collection needs to be safe: space and a person to care for it. If the owner of the property they are housed in decides to evict the collection, the collection faces homelessness. Without temperature-regulated storage, there is a high risk of a pest infestation and there are few things as edible as a Natural History collection.

If the museum manager decides to make the curator redundant, or makes cut-backs that result in people being responsible for multiple collections, again the collection runs the risk of predation but also of abject under-appreciation. With the best will in the world a geology curator with a geology collection already in his care will not be able to give an entomology collection the same amount of care and attention as a dedicated entomology curator could. It’s not just the division of time or the conflicting priorities, it’s also the nature of the challenges faced by the respective curators: an entomologist doesn’t have to worry about pyrite decay; a geologist doesn’t have to worry about live larvae in the specimen boxes.

Why is there a problem?

Firstly, we are culturally unused to thinking of a bunch of dead things having needs. We are good at recognising at-risk populations of living creatures even if we aren’t as good at doing something about it. Once those at-risk creatures die, we tend to think of that being the end of the story. For the people trying to preserve our continued understanding of those animals, this is only the beginning.

Secondly this government’s “bonfire of the quangos” resulted in the dissolution of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council – their responsibilities being placed upon the Arts Council. In the same way that a museum collection deteriorates with improper care and divided priorities, so too will museums and libraries if we aren’t careful. The Arts Council have taken their new responsibilities very seriously and credit to them but there is still the issue of time, skill sets, and priorities. Public interest have a role to play in the priorities too: it’s a lot easier to give the all-clear to the acquisition of a £5m Turner piece (which will make front page news) than it is to drum up £800 for new cabinets (which won’t even make the gossip column).

What can we do?

If you are a curator working in a collection that is under threat, or you have taken on responsibility for a collection outside of your comfort zone, you can join organisations like NatSCA which is a community of like-minded professionals willing to share their knowledge, skills, and resources.

If you are in the political sphere you can try and convince this government of the importance of the collections and push some money their way.

If you are entrepreneurially minded, take a look at your local museum and, if you spot some areas where they could ethically raise revenue, let them know.

If you are in education, impress upon the next generation how valuable these collections are so that, when they grow up and become curators, politicians, entrepreneurs, and teachers, they will be in a better position to protect their natural history than we are in today.

This isn’t one of those guilt-laden adverts with a crying Brachiosaurus skeleton begging you to donate or drop the charade of being a decent human being. All I want to do is get you thinking about the issue and what we can do to help.

Itch that Scratch

Tags

, , , , , ,

This comes as no surprise to some of you but I’ve been thinking about tyrannosaurs: how do those guys scratch themselves when they’re itchy? Their diminutive arms are only good for scratching parts of their chest. Their teeth are perfect for nibbling some regions and others can be reached with a good bear-style rub against a tree… but maybe they solve the problem the same way their closest living relatives do:

20130127-102902.jpg

This photo is from a set taken in April 2010, at London’s St. James’ Park. It’s one of those aspects of animal behaviour that all must engage in but few of us think about. When we picture pelicans we think of them catching fish but how often do we actually see them do it – compared to how much time they spend resting or engaging in social interactions?

20130127-104603.jpg

Even when eating, their diet is not just limited to fish and a pelican will think nothing of snacking on other birds’ chicks if the opportunity presents itself.

20130127-110648.jpg

So, in keeping with All Yesterdays, let’s not caricature our reconstructions to just one aspect of an animal’s behaviour: Maiasaura the good mother was probably irritable and territorial at times; Baryonyx did more than just hunt fish; tyrannosaurs stopped chewing their way through the Cretaceous and relieved their itches from time to time.

Feathered = feminine?!

The other night I found myself reading the comments on Trish A‘s post appealing to artists to stop drawing maniraptors scaly. One of the objections raised was that adding feathers to Velociraptors (Deinonychus/Utahraptor/whatever-the-hell Spielberg’s maniraptors were supposed to be) might make them too feminine. Humans are a funny species: we equate women wearing feather boas with the original wearer of the feathers – making all sorts of generalisations about the nature of being female in the process. The commenter went on to say that they thought the film might appeal more to girls than to boys if the dinosaurs were accurately feathered.

Assuming then that the platonic ideal boy is going to be attracted by action and violence, I thought I’d share a few bird things with you to dispell the myth that feathers equate to cute, fluffy, and harmless:

The bird temperament: a bird will not shy away from a confrontation to avoid getting its feathers messy, as this beautiful photograph by Martin Lukasiewicz demonstrates. In the photograph, a Flicker grabs a Red-headed Woodpecker’s tongue and doesn’t let go until they reach the ground. That’s a serioously dirty tactic!

This photo also, of pine siskins fighting, by Roy Hancliff shows how the delicate feathers of these little birds in no way prevent the birds from really brutal combat.

In Tarangire National Park, two ostriches go at each other. It may look absurd but the viciousness is undeniable. The victor walked away with a bloody gash in its underbelly:

In addition, merely owning feathers will not make you conventionally cute by default. If you think otherwise, look up: Shoebills (my new favourite extant dinosaur); Lappet-Faced Vultures; Marabou Storks; or Condors; I absolutely love these guys, they have so much character.

Lastly, just because it looks cute and fuzzy doesn’t mean it has a cute personality: how many people have duck frescoes adorning their kitchens without realising what horrendous sexual predators they are? How many give Christmas cards with robins on – blissfully unaware of how spiteful robins can be?

I am not writing this to put people off birds. I just want people to be realistic about our feathered neighbours – and to realise that a call to put integument on dinosaurs is not in any way a Disneyfication – if anything it makes them scarier.

Victorian Fire

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Colour, light, and science: all my happy places in one.

Colour, light, and science: all my happy places in one.

It is easy to caricature an entire period of history by its most well-known facts. All too easy, then, to think of Victorian England as a terribly stuffy place filled with sheltered women who faint at the sight of under-dressed furniture. This was not the image of Victorian England presented by Claire Benson.

Claire Benson, at a PubSci gathering at Elephant & Castle, discussed the role played by fire and explosions in human history. Most of us think of cave people discovering that roasted Megaloceros tastes better than raw but the story does not end there.

One key turning point was the invention of the Bunsen Burner in 1855. This led to domestic developments such as the gas cooker, which has changed our lives on a personal level. The technology that gave you baked food was the foundation for something much more fundamental and exciting: the development of spectroscopy:

When a substance is heated it emits a different light to another substance heated under the same conditions. To the eye this difference may go unnoticed but, when you split the rays with a prism, you start to see lines in the spectrum. These lines are also used to study the cosmos and how the universe is expanding.

While Claire was explaining this, she was creating a rainbow of fire on the table in front of her, using a combination of: lithium chloride (produces a red flame); sodium chloride (yellow flame); copper sulphate (green flame); ethanol (blue flame); and potassium (violet flame). Most materials have a much subtler heat signature than these: emitting what appears white with only a select few hues absent.

Claire discussed Bleak House – the character of Crook who died by ‘spontaneous’ human combustion. Dickens received a welcome grilling from his literary peers, who didn’t believe such a phenomenon was possible. Thanks to some experiments, by Dr. John DeHaan1, involving pigs we now know that it is possible – albeit not spontaneous.

The typical victims of Spontaneous Human Combustion are overweight heavy drinkers who smoke. When their bodies are found, there is nothing left of them but a pair of feet and a greasy residue on the walls. To simulate the conditions: pigs were wrapped in blankets; doused in alcohol; and set on fire. What they found was that the pig’s skin would split – the fat soaking into the blankets, which acted like a wick for a grotesque candle. A complete pig can be reduced to trotters in about five hours this way.

So we go from not-so spontaneous human combustion to spontaneous non-human combustion: namely cotton stores. Due to microbial action, cotton is self heating. If left entirely to its own devices, it can get hotter and hotter… Until it sparks, creating a chain reaction which engulfs the entire stock in no time.

A particularly bad warehouse fire in Tooley Street, London, started on the 22nd June 1861. Safety procedures for containing the fire were not followed and the fire quickly got out of control. At that time, the fire brigade was run by the insurance companies – previously there had been multiple fire brigades for each company that would only put out fires in houses that had a policy with them but this was unsustainable, given the spreading nature of fire. The fire spread from London Bridge to Tower Bridge and raged for 14 days. The total cost to the insurance company was £2 million – a huge sum in those days! The insurance companies told the government they couldn’t support the fire service any more. Three prompt years later, the fire service was nationalised. Such is the explosive power of small particles, that it can bring insurance firms to their knees and de-privatise emergency services.

We didn’t really get a handle on how combustible dust particles and spores were until the late 19th century and mining deaths by tunnel explosion triggered by dust were a common occurrence. Even when Europe finally gave in and accepted the evidence, the Americans didn’t regulate the dustiness of their mines until well into the 1920′s – it was just too hard to believe that a bit of dust could be so volatile and deadly.

Which brings us on to the most unstable and dangerous discovery of the Victorian era: Nitroglycerin:

When this substance was first discovered, it was immediately treated as dangerous but the full extent of the danger was not fully appreciated after the 2nd factory burnt to the ground: two years in a row. Nitroglycerin was deemed too dangerous to work with. That could have been the end of the story, were it not for Dr. William Murrell, who decided to try and use it for medicinal purposes! As it turns out, nitroglycerin (labelled “Trinitrin”) is still one of the best angina treatments out there.

So there you have it: explosions and fire shaped the Victorian world and will, no doubt, continue to do so: we may need an equivalent of the dust particle explosion if the National Health Service continues the way it has been recently.

Join us next month at PubSci for a special on Charles Darwin by Rachel Jennings.

References

1. DeHaan JD (1997), “A case of not-so spontaneous human combustion”, Fire & Arson Investigator 47 (4): 14-6.

The Unfeathered Bird: an Interview with Katrina van Grouw

Tags

, , , , , , ,

2012 was a very good year for Palaeoartists: first, there was Dinosaur Art; then, there was the game-changing All Yesterdays; and then, just as we reached the end of the year and thought we had received all the goodies we were going to, there came another book: The Unfeathered Bird, by Katrina van Grouw.

    The Review

I challenge any reader to walk away from this book without being blown away by the remarkable and diverse nature of birds. Just when you think you have seen every trick Avian Anatomy has to throw at you, you turn the page and are greeted by the windpipe of Phonygammus keraudrenii (the Trumpet Manucode) or the tongue of Picus viridis (the Green Woodpecker).

For me the biggest lesson was not to treat the forelimbs of birds as a 2-dimensional plane: though slender, they are not a glider and their forelimbs have substance.

I could go on and quote the jacket: over 200 species illustrated; some species never-before depicted; etc… or you could hear about it straight from the author’s mouth:

    The Interview

Q. How long have you been illustrating and how did it start?

Actually I’ve always considered myself a fine artist rather than an illustrator. That’s not being snobbish or anything, but I studied fine art for my BA and very seldom do illustrations for other people’s books. I’m much too self-opinionated and don’t like being told how to do my job!

But I began drawing birds when I was four or five and was a bit of a child prodigy when it came to artwork. That was by no means a good thing, and I suffered terribly as a result of ambitious and manipulative teachers. So much so that in my final school years I rebelled and tried to return to my earlier passion for natural history, applying to Oxford to read Zoology. Unfortunately by then I simply didn’t have the science background required. I ended up leaving school academically under-qualified and only applied to art college reluctantly, several years later, when there was nowhere else to turn.

It was whilst I was an undergraduate, at Exeter College of Art and Design (now the University of Plymouth) (the Royal College of Art came after that) that I began to produce anatomical drawings of birds that would eventually lead to The Unfeathered Bird.

After college I remained a self-employed fine artist, though sometimes it was necessary to subsidize my meagre income with a day job.

Q. Do you prefer to start and finish a piece before moving on, or do you work on a number of illustrations at once?

Preferably the former. I like to become obsessed with whatever I’m doing, and that simply isn’t possible when you’re doing several things at once.

Q. Many artists have favourite brands of pencil or brush , and methods for making the medium feel right (such as sharpening methods, trimming bristles, or crocheting stylus holders). is this the same for you?

Er, no, not really. I just use a B or a 2B pencil (whichever I pick up first). No particular brand. It helps to keep to the same brand of paper as the colour will differ slightly, but again, I just use the ordinary Windsor and Newton stuff from art shops.

Q. Who have been your inspirations and mentors along the way?

In my experience, living mentors are fine until you want to do something other than what they did – or wished they’d done. Then they bite you.

I prefer deceased heroes. And mine is John James Audubon. I’m a bit of a specialist on the history of natural history illustration, and within this subject Audubon is the closest to my heart. Not just for the images themselves, but for several similarities between the projects of The Birds of America and The Unfeathered Bird. Like mine, Audubon’s idea did not fit squarely into a niche – he had to fight for it, and believe in it. He was uncompromising and pig-headed like me, and put his book before everything and everyone else – like me. And both books took over 20 years to come to fruition. Audubon had to get his published in England. I had to get mine published in America. I’m not saying I’m on a par with Audubon – but only that – when the odds stacked up against me and I wanted to give it all up and just cry – I thought about Audubon, and carried on.

Q. Is the medium depicted in The Unfeathered Bird your preferred medium or have you employed the use of graphite pencils, oils, sculpture, etc for other projects?

Once upon a time, when I was Katrina Cook (before I married Hein van Grouw), I was best known as a printmaker and specialized in very large drypoints (a type of etching / engraving) on copper. I love the traditional printing techniques, and prided myself on really high quality editioning. Sadly when I moved to a smaller house to take up the job at The Natural History Museum I no longer had space for a studio and had to sell my etching press.

After this I worked predominantly with graphite sticks, producing enormous, dark, dramatic drawings of seabird colonies on precipitous cliffs.

Although it seems a million miles away from what I’m doing now, the interest in three dimensional structure is the same, and in fact many people have commented that they can sense a similarity.

Q. Some of the classic artists had eight stages to creating a finished work of art: from composition sketches to light studies with models/maquettes and drafts leading up to the final version. How many stages do your pieces go through?

For The Unfeathered Bird (and my next book, Unnatural Selection) Hein and I would discuss which position he should mount the skeleton in – choosing something that would reflect the bird’s typical behaviour and particular anatomical features. Then I’d just draw it, concentrating on getting all the proportions correct, before adding the fine detail.

For my previous and less illustrative artwork I would often draw a rough composition sketch about an inch high before beginning work. And of course produce field sketches and reference drawings from skin specimens and skeletons. In the case of landscapes I’d study maps and sometimes make models, though as often as not the entire piece would simply be done spontaneously, from the top of a cliff without prior preparation.

Q. Is illustration your full-time occupation now?

I’m now working on another book of anatomical drawings called Unnatural Selection. It’s about the way we’ve changed the structure of domesticated animals _ what we’ve done to wolves to get bulldogs and Chihuahuas etc. So drawing, writing and researching this will be my full time occupation for the next couple of years. At the same time I’ll be doing a little bit of journalism (I write for several bird magazines), a little bit of illustration for other people’s books (depending on getting an offer I can’t refuse), and a little bit of consultancy (I do odds and ends of work for libraries, publishers and auctioneers – mostly to do with historical natural history art.)

But despite being quite busy, I really don’t like being self-employed full-time. I get very lonely, and miss having some structure to my working week; I’d really prefer to have a part-time job as well.

Q. You used to be Ornithology curator for the Natural History Museum. That must have been an amazing resource for drawing subjects. Did you have a lot of time for illustrating while you were working there? How has moving on from the Museum affected your art (if at all)?

Aaah, the Natural History Museum…

Getting the job at The Natural History Museum was a dream-come-true and the most perfect ‘day job’ I could ever have dreamed of. I never once used the collections for my own artwork, however, preferring to keep my two professions strictly separate (in fact this question was raised during my interview and I kept my promise throughout the seven years I worked there). But I was more than content with this arrangement and enjoyed being a professional ornithologist. I kept no secret of my ambition to produce The Unfeathered Bird so it was a bitter blow when I was told (several years into the job) that the head of the zoology department prohibits curators from writing books in their spare time on the grounds of ‘using knowledge gained in the course of their employment’. Although I could justifiably have fought this, I wanted to remain on good terms with my ex-colleagues (particularly as my husband still works there) so I left to concentrate on finishing The Unfeathered Bird. At that time I was job-sharing with my husband, so he was able to take over my hours without any loss of household income. But the decision nigh on broke my heart and not a day passes when I don’t wish I still worked there.

Q. Are you happier illustrating wildlife rather than people? Or do you draw people too on occasion? Or, given that people are animals, do you feel there is a distinction at all?

I think the disciplines are the same, whatever you draw. There’s no better way to hone your skills in eye-hand co-ordination than to draw people – because we instinctively know when the anatomy is wrong. You can’t bluff your way out! I’ve always done as much life drawing as I possibly can – purely as a way of keeping my observation skills sharp. I’m not really interested in producing ‘finished’ artwork of people though. The anatomy books tick all the creative boxes for me at the moment, and the process of thinking out the ideas behind the books, designing them and writing them, is every bit as rewarding as doing the illustrations. After Unnatural Selection though, I’m planning to do an anatomy of mammals, and that will certainly contain humans.

    The Gallery

All artwork by and copyright of Katrina van Grouw, reprinted with permission. More of her work can be seen on The Unfeathered Bird site.

Macaw muscle study. Reprinted with permission.

A reminder of the stockiness of some birds.

Green Woodpecker. Reprinted with permission.

Where taste and smell meet.

Mallard muscle study. Reprinted with permission.

Inside every duck is a theropod trying to get out.

Frozen Beauty

Tags

, , ,

It’s easy to grumble in this weather. I don’t like the cold or the ever- present danger of slipping. There is one thing we mustn’t take for granted though: how lovely it is.

For those of a prehistoric disposition, one can imagine shaggy-coated Hadrosaurs marching bleakly through the bitter cold in search of hardy foliage or – if they’re really lucky – the occasional fruit.

Ice can also carve the most incredible landscapes, as David Attenborough’s Frozen Planet so clearly demonstrates.

Here’s a few photographs taken on my walk to work this morning to inspire you:

20121212-180547.jpg
Skeletal Tree

20121212-180615.jpg
Misty Sunrise

20121212-180654.jpg
Grassycles

20121212-180710.jpg
Frozen cobweb

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 244 other followers